When Lefties pitch Socialism do they realize what decent people hear?

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

"Yep capitalism fascism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening."

fixt

Fascism manages corporations by the state, that's the opposite of what we have where corporations manage the state.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Is America better if some Americans can't feed their families? Is making Americans suffer hunger part of making America great again?

Do you pay taxes for parks? If you don't use the parks system, isn't that someone else (you) paying for someone else's stuff? If you have no children, should you pay school taxes?

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

I should probably let you in on a little secret...one you seem oblivious to. You see, it’s not really the money that causes extreme discontent and hatred toward the poor. Most are vile, filthy, indecent, immoral, criminal, baby making lowlifes...good people have trouble embracing the idea of paying them even $1. Are you starting to get it?

There's a lot of lowlifes in the top 1% too, not only are they usually unfriendly snots, they also have a massive drug problem too, they are usually the ones hiring illegals in mass from Mexico, and outsourcing in mass to China.

 

[MisterBeale]

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

WTF, food stamps just disappear from your memory, good thing you can go back and re-read.
In regards to section 8, that's fine, after three years, too fricken bad.

I mentioned food benefits, you chose not to read about it.

You did mention food benefits, and I responded to your post. Then you jumped into Section 8...you really do need to learn to pay attention.

On paying attention:

I said I was the building inspector and worked with Section Eight. Then I wrote I also worked with Jons and Family Services. They administer the food benefit program. Why are you questioning my attention span when your's is so deficient?

HUD Scandals

Big Agriculture Is a Glutton for Food Stamps | Bernadette Barber

Capitalism isn't the problem. Socialism isn't the answer.

Government is the Problem, Freedom is the answer.

 

[ph3iron]

Enjoy the Fortune 500

When the collective wins... the individual always loses

Or the collective wins. LoL.

That is my point there’s no such thing as the individual in a socialist society

Enjoy the Fortune 500

 

[dblack]

Fascism manages corporations by the state, that's the opposite of what we have where corporations manage the state.

It's the same thing. When government meddles in the economy there's no clear way to say who's controlling who. Whenever an industry becomes heavily regulated, the players become heavily invested in controlling that regulation.

 

[MisterBeale]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

"Yep capitalism fascism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening."

fixt

Fascism manages corporations by the state, that's the opposite of what we have where corporations manage the state.

I love how you think you know what fascism is more than Mussolini, that's rich.

The folks that populate both are the same, it makes no difference. It's just a merger of state and corporate power. That you believe there is a distinction means you are living in a fantasy world.

Revolving door (politics) - Wikipedia

Iron triangle (US politics) - Wikipedia

Council On Foreign Relations
Corporate Members

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

"Yep capitalism fascism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening."

fixt

Fascism manages corporations by the state, that's the opposite of what we have where corporations manage the state.

I love how you think you know what fascism is more than Mussolini, that's rich.

The folks that populate both are the same, it makes no difference. It's just a merger of state and corporate power. That you believe there is a distinction means you are living in a fantasy world.

Revolving door (politics) - Wikipedia

Iron triangle (US politics) - Wikipedia

Council On Foreign Relations
Corporate Members

Mussolini had Councils by the government control the Corporations, that's nothing like what we have in the U.S.A.

 

[MisterBeale]

 

[MisterBeale]

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith


Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

"Yep capitalism fascism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening."

fixt

Fascism manages corporations by the state, that's the opposite of what we have where corporations manage the state.

I love how you think you know what fascism is more than Mussolini, that's rich.

The folks that populate both are the same, it makes no difference. It's just a merger of state and corporate power. That you believe there is a distinction means you are living in a fantasy world.

Revolving door (politics) - Wikipedia

Iron triangle (US politics) - Wikipedia

Council On Foreign Relations
Corporate Members

Mussolini had Councils by the government control the Corporations, that's nothing like what we have in the U.S.A.

. . . of course not.

Ours is a fluffy, feel good, for the people, with no interests involved. Who do you think is on these regulatory agencies?

You really need to go to college or University to find out how this all works.

This is just a very, very short list. . . .

They regulate and control, EVERYTHING.

You can't even run a lemon-aid stand or give someone first aid for a profit, some times even for charity, without breaking some law now. Some corporate interest will make sure you are running a foul of these fascists.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

"Yep capitalism fascism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening."

fixt

Fascism manages corporations by the state, that's the opposite of what we have where corporations manage the state.

I love how you think you know what fascism is more than Mussolini, that's rich.

The folks that populate both are the same, it makes no difference. It's just a merger of state and corporate power. That you believe there is a distinction means you are living in a fantasy world.

Revolving door (politics) - Wikipedia

Iron triangle (US politics) - Wikipedia

Council On Foreign Relations
Corporate Members

Mussolini had Councils by the government control the Corporations, that's nothing like what we have in the U.S.A.

. . . of course not.

Ours is a fluffy, feel good, for the people, with no interests involved. Who do you think is on these regulatory agencies?

You really need to go to college or University to find out how this all works.

This is just a very, very short list. . . .

They regulate and control, EVERYTHING.

You can't even run a lemon-aid stand or give someone first aid for a profit, some times even for charity, without breaking some law now. Some corporate interest will make sure you are running a foul of these fascists.

So, it's better to have food, drugs, and pollution etc. as unregulated?

This is why Europeans think of Republicans as stupid hicks.

 

[Tehon]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

"Yep capitalism fascism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening."

fixt

Fascism manages corporations by the state, that's the opposite of what we have where corporations manage the state.

Truth.

The fascists use the power of the state to control industry to meet national objectives.

Here the corporations use the power of the state to increase private profits.

 

[dblack]

Truth.

The fascists use the power of the state to control industry to meet national objectives.

Here the corporations use the power of the state to increase private profits.

It's both.

 

[dblack]

So, it's better to have food, drugs, and pollution etc. as unregulated?

Yes.

 

[MisterBeale]

So, it's better to have food, drugs, and pollution etc. as unregulated?

Yes.

I think it is a false dichotomy. I don't think it is necessary for us to go to extremes. The topic here is Socialism. Fascism, as an economic philosophy, just as State Communism, are both types of Socialism. Just like the Corporate Capitalism we have now, they are ruinous, and undesirable to the ends of a sovereign and free people. Reforms are necessary or it will ultimately be the end of freedom.

If I had to choose between fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or late 19th century America before the institution of the Federal Reserve, as far as corporate rights go?

I know where I would choose to live. But then, I would definitely want to be a white man in that period too, rather than a women, black, native American, etc.

 

[Tehon]

Truth.

The fascists use the power of the state to control industry to meet national objectives.

Here the corporations use the power of the state to increase private profits.

It's both.

It just seems like it is both because here the power of the State is not truly centralized.

 

[MisterBeale]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Not to discount anything you have said, I believe you, but. You can make it as complicated as you want, it isn't that difficult. Capital's only motive is to seek a profit. You can't tell me that in the absence of government, industry will not collude to find the lowest labor rate necessary to sustain its wage labor. Minimum wage laws were not enacted for no reason and they were enacted before the Federal Reserve Act.

I will agree with that.

The biggest problem back in that era, and to a certain extent, this problem persists, is government support lay with business, not with the people. It doesn't matter if it is at the federal, state, or city level. Politicians know where the tax base is and they protect it.

I see it on this forum. The CFR controls the media, the media controls the minds of the public. Overall, there is an anti-labor POV. There is no respect for collective bargaining or the right to organize.

Organized, grass roots movements for justice have always been looked at with disdain by the individual, for it is the individual that is glorified in this nation, not the mob. The mob is ALWAYS looked at with suspicion. Probably for good cause.


“In marching, in mobs, in football games, and in war, outlines become vague; real things become unreal and a fog creeps over the mind. Tension and excitement, weariness, movement--all merge in one great gray dream, so that when it is over, it is hard to remember how it was when you killed men or ordered them to be killed. Then other people who were not there tell you what it was like and you say vaguely, "yes, I guess that's how it was.”

― John Steinbeck, The Moon Is Down

 

[bripat9643]

They do. Why do you believe they don't?

Because the socioeconomic reality in America is not the same as it is in any other country.
Canada, as an example, has a different health care system than we do.

They both follow the laws of economics. When you establish a monopoly, the price goes up and the service goes down.

Enjoy your red herring.
That has nothing to do with society determining its socioeconomic reality.

I said "the laws of economics." I have no idea what your conception of "socioeconomic reality" is. It has no scientific meaning. the bottom line is that the laws of economics aren't affected by what people believe or what laws they pass. They are as immutable as the laws of gravity.

The laws of economics say government run healthcare is a disaster.

I'm not here to dispute your laws of economics in this thread, nor to discuss science. If you wish to engage me in a discussion on what I actually said that would be great.
Let me try to simplify the big words for you.

Definition of SOCIOECONOMIC
: of, relating to, or involving a combination of social and economic factors

My point was that the economy serves a social function and that different societies organize it in different ways.

Whatever way they organize it, the result is subject to the laws of economics. If they organize it in ways fly in the face of the laws of economics, then the results will be negative. If they organized it in a way that is cognizant of the laws of economics, then the result will be positive. Socialism is a means of organizing society that ignores the laws of economics and destined to cause a society to swirl down the toilet bowl.

 

[dblack]

Truth.

The fascists use the power of the state to control industry to meet national objectives.

Here the corporations use the power of the state to increase private profits.

It's both.

It just seems like it is both because here the power of the State is not truly centralized.

LOL

So, it's better to have food, drugs, and pollution etc. as unregulated?

Yes.

I think it is a false dichotomy. I don't think it is necessary for us to go to extremes.

The problem is all the equivocation around "regulation". Saying that the government shouldn't be regulating something isn't the same as saying there should be no laws. We can make it illegal to poison people, sell bad drugs or pollute the environment without "regulation". It's fine, for example, to have a law saying companies, or individuals, can't dump their waste in the river. It becomes "regulation" when you tell them that they must dispose of their waste via government approved methods.

 

[Tehon]

Because the socioeconomic reality in America is not the same as it is in any other country.
Canada, as an example, has a different health care system than we do.

They both follow the laws of economics. When you establish a monopoly, the price goes up and the service goes down.

Enjoy your red herring.
That has nothing to do with society determining its socioeconomic reality.

I said "the laws of economics." I have no idea what your conception of "socioeconomic reality" is. It has no scientific meaning. the bottom line is that the laws of economics aren't affected by what people believe or what laws they pass. They are as immutable as the laws of gravity.

The laws of economics say government run healthcare is a disaster.

I'm not here to dispute your laws of economics in this thread, nor to discuss science. If you wish to engage me in a discussion on what I actually said that would be great.
Let me try to simplify the big words for you.

Definition of SOCIOECONOMIC
: of, relating to, or involving a combination of social and economic factors

My point was that the economy serves a social function and that different societies organize it in different ways.

Whatever way they organize it, the result is subject to the laws of economics. If they organize it in ways fly in the face of the laws of economics, then the results will be negative. If they organized it in a way that is cognizant of the laws of economics, then the result will be positive. Socialism is a means of organizing society that ignores the laws of economics and destined to cause a society to swirl down the toilet bowl.

Okay, I wasn't arguing in favor of any particular type of organization and if I was capitalist laws would not apply. I just said that I had little choice but to participate in the way we are socially organized.

 

[MisterBeale]

Truth.

The fascists use the power of the state to control industry to meet national objectives.

Here the corporations use the power of the state to increase private profits.

It's both.

It just seems like it is both because here the power of the State is not truly centralized.

LOL

So, it's better to have food, drugs, and pollution etc. as unregulated?

Yes.

I think it is a false dichotomy. I don't think it is necessary for us to go to extremes.

The problem is all the equivocation around "regulation". Saying that the government shouldn't be regulating something isn't the same as saying there should be no laws. We can make it illegal to poison people, sell bad drugs or pollute the environment without "regulation". It's fine, for example, to have a law saying companies, or individuals, can't dump their waste in the river. It becomes "regulation" when you tell them that they must dispose of their waste via government approved methods.

Agreed.

Regulation vs. Litigation: Perspectives from Economics and Law